Fixed purchasing with `PromotionalOffer`s using `StoreKit 2` by NachoSoto · Pull Request #2020 · RevenueCat/purchases-ios

NachoSoto · 2022-11-02T18:54:50Z

Fixes SDKONCALL-160, SDKONCALL-182, #2114, and RevenueCat/react-native-purchases#455.
Depends on #2118 and https://github.com/RevenueCat/khepri/pull/4843 / https://github.com/RevenueCat/khepri/pull/4852.

Changes:

Base64decode signature
Fixed signature on backend for SK2: https://github.com/RevenueCat/khepri/pull/4843 / https://github.com/RevenueCat/khepri/pull/4852
Added tests
Added specific error if signature can't be decoded:

[Purchases] - ERROR: 😿‼️ The information associated with this PromotionalOffer is not valid.
See https://rev.cat/ios-subscription-offers for more info. The signature generated by RevenueCat could not be decoded: signature 914

NachoSoto · 2022-11-02T18:56:19Z

    var sk2PurchaseOption: Product.PurchaseOption {
+        let signature: Data
+
+        if let decoded = Data(base64Encoded: self.signature) {


I was hoping this would fix it, but the test is still failing :/

I'm out of ideas, I'll probably have to file a Radar and pray? 🙏🏻

⚠️

Looks like one of our customers tried to do this without RC, using StoreKit directly, and he gets the same result, so that confirms the fact that this is an Apple bug.
He's opened a TSI with Apple, so hopefully they can address this soon.

In the mean time, I'll leave this PR open. I believe the fix here will still be required (doing the base64 decode). But once Apple fixes it on their end we can use this PR to confirm, as well as the now enabled test.

Do you have the ticket # with Apple?

Not sure about the original, but we reported it today as well under: FB11764024.

aboedo · 2022-11-03T18:42:13Z

+        if let decoded = Data(base64Encoded: self.signature) {
+            signature = decoded
+        } else {
+            // TODO: log warning


Yeah, definitely worth logging something loud here.
Stuff logged from here would also show up in the diagnostics API call, right? since we get offerings and parse products?

Yeah, definitely worth logging something loud here.

👍🏻

Stuff logged from here would also show up in the diagnostics API call, right? since we get offerings and parse products?

This property is only used when purchasing though.

…ons` This changes the default back to `StoreKit 1`. We decided to do this for the following reasons: - Purchasing with `PromotionalOffer`s does not work with StoreKit 2 due to an Apple bug (see #2020 (comment)) - `checkTrialOrIntroDiscountEligibility` is significantly slower with StoreKit 2 (#1893). We're adding optimizations to help with that (#2007), but the underlying logic will still be slow. - A rare race-condition where `StoreKit 2` does not have transactions after a purchase ([TRIAGE-82]). We have some workarounds (#1945), but it's still being investigated. _ Note: This effectively reverts 0ee540a. That commit made it easier to only change the default in one place which is why this PR is basically just one line._

…ons` (#2022) This changes the default back to `StoreKit 1`. We decided to do this for the following reasons: - Purchasing with `PromotionalOffer`s does not work with StoreKit 2 due to an Apple bug (see #2020 (comment)) - `checkTrialOrIntroDiscountEligibility` is significantly slower with `StoreKit 2` (#1893). We're adding optimizations to help with that (#2007), but the underlying logic will still be slow. - A rare race-condition where `StoreKit 2` does not have transactions after a purchase ([TRIAGE-82]). We have some workarounds (#1945), but it's still being investigated. _Note: This effectively reverts 0ee540a. That commit made it easier to only change the default in one place which is why this PR is basically just one line._ [TRIAGE-82]: https://revenuecats.atlassian.net/browse/TRIAGE-82?atlOrigin=eyJpIjoiNWRkNTljNzYxNjVmNDY3MDlhMDU5Y2ZhYzA5YTRkZjUiLCJwIjoiZ2l0aHViLWNvbS1KU1cifQ

NachoSoto · 2022-11-09T14:34:02Z

I just realized this cursed PR is # 2020 🙈

aboedo · 2022-11-09T17:49:47Z

I just realized this cursed PR is # 2020 🙈

#destiny

mamouneyya · 2022-12-02T17:51:45Z

Update: We noticed today that this started to work actually. Also, I can confirm that the decoding logic in this PR is important. When not decoding the signature, I was getting the invalidOfferSignature error code every time.

Something I'm a bit confused about is the fact that this is now working even when using a simulator and a StoreKit testing store file. I thought that in that scenario, Xcode won't make any remote request, so I cannot understand how this was fixed from the App Store server side. Glad it is though.

NachoSoto · 2022-12-03T06:52:39Z

Interesting, our integration test is still failing. I'll dig more next week though.

NachoSoto · 2022-12-05T18:42:33Z

Update: We noticed today that this started to work actually. Also, I can confirm that the decoding logic in this PR is important. When not decoding the signature, I was getting the invalidOfferSignature error code every time.

Weird, I can't get this to work even with this fix. Are you doing something else differently? Is it running on iOS 16.1.2 only or something?

mamouneyya · 2022-12-05T21:53:35Z

Weird, I can't get this to work even with this fix. Are you doing something else differently? Is it running on iOS 16.1.2 only or something?

My personal device is still at 15.7. I could get it working on it, plus when using Xcode 14.1 with a simulator and a StoreKit test store file. Another colleague confirmed he could get it working on 15.7 as well.

Not sure this is relevant to you, but I noticed that when using the sample server app Apple attached here to generate the signature, you shouldn't omit the applicationUsername param but instead you should pass an empty string when you don't want to include a appAccountToken(_:) in the options. Otherwise, the token will be included in the signature as a string value of "undefined".

mamouneyya · 2022-12-05T22:01:33Z

The test cases we validated included when you're an active member or a former member. Meaning, purchasing a subscription with a promo offer when you have an active subscription already, and purchasing a subscription with a promo offer after cancelling a previous subscription.

NachoSoto · 2022-12-05T22:11:51Z

Thanks, I just ran it on iOS 15.x and it's still failing. I verified in our backend that the username is never empty.

NachoSoto · 2022-12-05T22:13:52Z

I love how the docs aren't even updated for SK2?

mamouneyya · 2022-12-05T22:21:31Z

Thanks, I just ran it on iOS 15.x and it's still failing. I verified in our backend that the username is never empty.

By never empty, do you mean that you're actually using a value when generating the signature? If that's the case, then you'll have to pass an .appAccountToken(_:) purchase option with the exact same value.

NachoSoto · 2022-12-05T22:27:50Z

By never empty, do you mean that you're actually using a value when generating the signature? If that's the case, then you'll have to pass an .appAccountToken(_:) purchase option with the exact same value.

Whoa we're definitely not doing that.

This is still not working:

options.insert(signedData.sk2PurchaseOption)
options.insert(.appAccountToken(UUID(uuidString: self.appUserID)!))

But I feel like we're on the right track. I missed this:

If you're providing an appAccountToken in the purchase options, you must include that value when you generate the signature. Use lowercase for the UUID string representations of the app account token and the nonce in the siganture.

NachoSoto · 2022-12-05T22:28:10Z

(Testing now calling lowercased())

NachoSoto · 2022-12-05T22:30:59Z

applicationUsername or appAccountToken
An optional string value that you define; may be an empty string. If your app uses applicationUsername, provide applicationUsername. If your app uses appAccountToken, provide appAccountToken. Use lowercase for the string representation of appAccountToken.

Our backend isn't lowercasing the user ID for SK2, so that's likely the issue.

NachoSoto · 2022-12-05T22:33:20Z

CONFIRMED!
Using a lowercase user ID (and passing the missing .appAccountToken) makes the test pass.

Thanks a lot for that pointer @mamouneyya! We'll get this fixed.

mamouneyya · 2022-12-05T22:34:51Z

CONFIRMED! Using a lowercase user ID (and passing the missing .appAccountToken) makes the test pass.

Thanks a lot for that pointer @mamouneyya! We'll get this fixed.

Wohoo! Glad you got it working! 🎉

This will be used for https://github.com/RevenueCat/khepri/pull/4843, to fix [SDKONCALL-160] and #2020.

NachoSoto · 2022-12-05T23:50:40Z

+            if let decoded = Data(base64Encoded: self.signature) {
+                signature = decoded
+            } else {
+                throw Error.failedToDecodeSignature(self.signature)


I improved error handling here (the last TODO) and added a few tests.

NachoSoto · 2022-12-05T23:50:48Z

    @available(iOS 15.2, tvOS 15.2, macOS 12.1, watchOS 8.3, *)
    func testPurchaseWithPromotionalOffer() async throws {
        try AvailabilityChecks.iOS15APIAvailableOrSkipTest()
-        try XCTSkipIf(Self.storeKit2Setting == .enabledForCompatibleDevices,


aboedo · 2022-12-07T18:15:23Z

thinking more about this:
if, for affected versions, the backend sent the signature as utf 8 instead of base64 encoded, wouldn't that fix them?

NachoSoto · 2022-12-08T01:11:41Z

thinking more about this:
if, for affected versions, the backend sent the signature as utf 8 instead of base64 encoded, wouldn't that fix them?

Here's an example base64 encoded signature:

MEQCIEQlmZRNfYzKBSE8QnhLTIHZZZWCFgZpRqRxHss65KoFAiAJgJKjdrWdkLUOCCjuEx2RmFS7daRzSVZRVZ8RyMyUXg

And decoded:

0D� D%M}�!<BxKLe��iFq�:�� v��(��TusIVQU�̔^

I suppose if the backend sent it without encoding, and we create the Data with the existing implementation (Data(self.utf8)) it might work.
We should test this locally. Who can help with that?

This will be used for https://github.com/RevenueCat/khepri/pull/4843, to fix [SDKONCALL-160] and #2020.

…d` (#2118) This will be used for https://github.com/RevenueCat/khepri/pull/4843, to fix [SDKONCALL-160] and #2020. `X-StoreKit2-Setting` only told us if the apps had that setting enabled. However, when running on an older device, `SK2` would still be disabled. [SDKONCALL-160]: https://revenuecats.atlassian.net/browse/SDKONCALL-160?atlOrigin=eyJpIjoiNWRkNTljNzYxNjVmNDY3MDlhMDU5Y2ZhYzA5YTRkZjUiLCJwIjoiZ2l0aHViLWNvbS1KU1cifQ

aboedo · 2022-12-09T18:56:52Z

why not base64 the result of this so it looks realistic?

This is

testPurchaseSK2PackageWithInvalidPromotionalOfferSignatureThrowsError

So I'm testing that if it's not base64 (so it's just a random string), it produces the correct error instead of crashing or something.

Fixes [SDKONCALL-160].

NachoSoto · 2022-12-09T23:04:23Z

Merging 🎉

KrisJulioRSVP · 2023-03-20T06:24:34Z

This solves my problem, Im just passing empty string in applicationUsername and it works. Thank you guys! Apple documentation is pain in the a$$

NachoSoto added the pr:fix A bug fix label Nov 2, 2022

NachoSoto requested a review from a team November 2, 2022 18:54

NachoSoto force-pushed the sk2-promo-purchases branch from f40b7bb to a2d3047 Compare November 2, 2022 18:56

NachoSoto commented Nov 2, 2022

View reviewed changes

NachoSoto added the blocked label Nov 2, 2022

aboedo reviewed Nov 3, 2022

View reviewed changes

NachoSoto mentioned this pull request Nov 4, 2022

Changed StoreKit2Setting.default back to .enabledOnlyForOptimizations #2022

Merged

NachoSoto mentioned this pull request Nov 7, 2022

[iOS] purchaseDiscountedProduct throws an error when using usesStoreKit2IfAvailable RevenueCat/react-native-purchases#455

Closed

NachoSoto mentioned this pull request Nov 9, 2022

StoreKitIntegrationTests: added test to check applying a promotional offer during subscription #1588

Merged

1 task

NachoSoto force-pushed the sk2-promo-purchases branch from a2d3047 to 58e9c22 Compare November 15, 2022 19:18

NachoSoto force-pushed the sk2-promo-purchases branch from 58e9c22 to 2c82f1f Compare November 23, 2022 19:03

NachoSoto requested a review from a team December 5, 2022 18:43

NachoSoto force-pushed the sk2-promo-purchases branch from 2c82f1f to 22beb89 Compare December 5, 2022 18:43

NachoSoto changed the title ~~StoreKit2: fix purchasing with PromotionalOffers~~ StoreKit 2: fix purchasing with PromotionalOffers Dec 5, 2022

NachoSoto added a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 5, 2022

HTTPClient: added X-StoreKit2-Enabled header

8a522ee

This will be used for https://github.com/RevenueCat/khepri/pull/4843, to fix [SDKONCALL-160] and #2020.

NachoSoto mentioned this pull request Dec 5, 2022

HTTPClient: replaced X-StoreKit2-Setting with X-StoreKit2-Enabled #2118

Merged

NachoSoto marked this pull request as ready for review December 5, 2022 23:49

NachoSoto force-pushed the sk2-promo-purchases branch from 22beb89 to 5038cef Compare December 5, 2022 23:49

NachoSoto removed the blocked label Dec 5, 2022

NachoSoto changed the title ~~StoreKit 2: fix purchasing with PromotionalOffers~~ Fixed purchasing with PromotionalOffers using StoreKit 2 Dec 5, 2022

NachoSoto commented Dec 5, 2022

View reviewed changes

NachoSoto mentioned this pull request Dec 6, 2022

StoreKit 2 - Promotional Offers - .invalidOfferSignature error. Can't purchase any offer. #2114

Closed

NachoSoto linked an issue Dec 6, 2022 that may be closed by this pull request

StoreKit 2 - Promotional Offers - .invalidOfferSignature error. Can't purchase any offer. #2114

Closed

NachoSoto added the feat:StoreKit 2 label Dec 6, 2022

NachoSoto added a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 9, 2022

HTTPClient: added X-StoreKit2-Enabled header

fd9bfeb

This will be used for https://github.com/RevenueCat/khepri/pull/4843, to fix [SDKONCALL-160] and #2020.

NachoSoto force-pushed the sk2-promo-purchases branch from 5038cef to 4f4e0f8 Compare December 9, 2022 18:08

NachoSoto requested a review from aboedo December 9, 2022 18:08

NachoSoto force-pushed the sk2-promo-purchases branch from 4f4e0f8 to 24b938e Compare December 9, 2022 18:39

aboedo approved these changes Dec 9, 2022

View reviewed changes

NachoSoto added 2 commits December 9, 2022 12:35

Fixed SK2 promo purchases

09c1d91

Fixes [SDKONCALL-160].

Improved error handling and added tests

a36c1b6

NachoSoto force-pushed the sk2-promo-purchases branch from 24b938e to a36c1b6 Compare December 9, 2022 21:50

NachoSoto merged commit 8e32400 into main Dec 9, 2022

NachoSoto deleted the sk2-promo-purchases branch December 9, 2022 23:04

RCGitBot mentioned this pull request Dec 9, 2022

[AUTOMATIC] Release/4.15.2 #2130

Merged

Uh oh!

Conversation

NachoSoto commented Nov 2, 2022 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Changes:

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

NachoSoto Nov 3, 2022 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

NachoSoto commented Nov 9, 2022

Uh oh!

aboedo commented Nov 9, 2022 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

mamouneyya commented Dec 2, 2022

Uh oh!

NachoSoto commented Dec 3, 2022

Uh oh!

NachoSoto commented Dec 5, 2022

Uh oh!

mamouneyya commented Dec 5, 2022 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

mamouneyya commented Dec 5, 2022

Uh oh!

NachoSoto commented Dec 5, 2022

Uh oh!

NachoSoto commented Dec 5, 2022

Uh oh!

mamouneyya commented Dec 5, 2022 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

NachoSoto commented Dec 5, 2022

Uh oh!

NachoSoto commented Dec 5, 2022

Uh oh!

NachoSoto commented Dec 5, 2022

Uh oh!

NachoSoto commented Dec 5, 2022

Uh oh!

mamouneyya commented Dec 5, 2022

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

aboedo commented Dec 7, 2022

Uh oh!

NachoSoto commented Dec 8, 2022

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

NachoSoto commented Dec 9, 2022

Uh oh!

KrisJulioRSVP commented Mar 20, 2023 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

5 participants

NachoSoto commented Nov 2, 2022 •

edited

Loading

NachoSoto Nov 3, 2022 •

edited

Loading

aboedo commented Nov 9, 2022 •

edited

Loading

mamouneyya commented Dec 5, 2022 •

edited

Loading

mamouneyya commented Dec 5, 2022 •

edited

Loading

KrisJulioRSVP commented Mar 20, 2023 •

edited

Loading